Murdock, Mark (Mark.Murdock@Unisys.Com)
Sat, 6 Dec 1997 09:49:19 +0100
Thanks for your response.
> Looking at the Subject Object Data Values paper on LS site I would say
> would put GOD in the conceptually unknown catagory which would agree
> with what
> Mangus is saying.
Yes, faith is indeed the belief, the knowing, of something in which we
cannot conceptualize or intellectualize. But lumping any possibility of
a higher self, above the intellectual, to this realm moves us away from
the possibility. We can know God and we can know our "God-selves."
Are these beliefs social values only? Perhaps. Society certainly
values the results of these beliefs, people gathering in communities,
obeying laws, etc. But what are the beliefs themselves? Maybe they are
spiritual values or something evolved beyond the intellect.
Something is missing from Pirsig's model of values. It maintains a
certain resolution as defined by the intellect. It's a classic quality
model, recognizing romantic quality only as the conceptually unknown, or
DQ. It's as if Lila abandoned some principles of ZMM. Like Pirsig
forgot about that Korean wall or equated it with Dynamic Quality. Yet,
Pirsig didn't experience the source of all things, he experienced that
wall in Korea. There is a difference I think.
There is a space in which DQ does mediate reality before
intellectualization takes place. This space deserves a place in the
model, I think, some resolution from DQ itself.
Of course, I could be wrong. :)
> post message - mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
> unsubscribe/queries - mailto:email@example.com
> homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
-- post message - mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org unsubscribe/queries - mailto:email@example.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:25 CEST